CEE in the News 2017

The rise of academies promised more power for schools - but, with government still clinging to the reins, heads haven't been able to raise standards as expected. However, this system may yet deliver - if ministers ring the changes, writes James Croft.

The Academies Act of 2010 purported to take school autonomy to a new level. The jury is still out on whether this could make a difference for pupil outcomes, but doubts have, justifiably, begun to emerge. While there is evidence of a positive impact in pre-2010 sponsored academies, recent research from the London School of Economics finds no trace of post-conversion improvement in previously "good", "satisfactory" or "inadequate" converters, as well as a concerning degree of heterogeneity.

Perhaps the public knew that Brexit would drain their wallets, but voted for it anyway. Sometimes it’s not the economy, stupid. But Simon Wren-Lewis, of Oxford University, rubbished this idea, pointing out that those who voted for Brexit said they were unwilling to pay to reduce immigration. Instead, people seemed misinformed. Not only did those who voted to leave the EU think that they would be no worse off as a result, they thought that lower immigration would improve their access to public services. The problem, Mr Wren-Lewis argued, was with the media. Dismissing a large fraction as producers of propoganda, he reserved most disappointment for the BBC. It failed to communicate the consensus among economists, he said, treating it as opinion rather than knowledge. Swati Dhingra, of the London School of Economics, agreed, saying that the BBC’s quest to generate balance gave the false impression that there was a meaningful debate between economists. (Depressingly, she noted that this false balance had oozed into policymaking, as select committees are being stacked with pro-Brexit voices.)

Breakfast means breakfast

Amid the pastries, the presentations and the self-flagellation, it might have been easy to forget what the point of it all. An article in The Independent, previewing the conference, and highlighted by Paul Johnson on the first day of the conference, provided a helpful reminder. ‘Economics research can really improve people’s lives’, wrote Hamish McRae. While the public associates economics with GDP and abstract equations, much of the research presented at the conference was focused on how to make people’s lives better. Examples I saw included a paper presented by Christine Farquharson of the IFS, which suggested that free school breakfasts are a cheap way to help children do better in school. A panel discussion on re-skilling the UK between Steve Machin, Kirabo Jackson, Richard Burgess and Sandra McNally tossed around tax credits for investment in skills and training, a plea for more thinking about teacher quality, and from Kirabo Jackson, to think about the education system as a whole, rather than separate, substitutable stages. Football scheduling was on the list too: boys perform worse in exams when they coincide with international football tournaments.

The UK’s productivity suffered a shock in 2008 from which it has not recovered, and the ‘skills problem’ needs to be addressed. Within the context of a broader industrial strategy, improving skills is part of the solution – but Brexit may well harm these efforts if the feared negative economic effects put additional pressure on public finances. Likewise, Brexit will not help if prolonged uncertainty discourages employer investment in skills; nor if employers substitute capital for labour as a response to migration barriers. However, Brexit does do is bring the skills problem into sharper focus.

The Education Policy Institute (EPI) has published a new paper examining the impact of academies on educational outcomes. The comprehensive report brings together EPI’s own analysis, along with research undertaken by the London School of Economics.

Our principal finding through this extensive study is that academies do not provide an automatic solution to school improvement. As we demonstrate throughout this report, there is significant variation in performance at both different types of academies and Multi-Academy Trusts.

Related publications

The Impact of Academies on Educational Outcomes, Jon Andrews and Natalie Perera with Andrew Eyles, Gabriel Heller Sahlgren, Stephen Machin, Matteo Sandi and Olmo Silva, Education Policy Institute and London School of Economics and Political Science Report, July 2017

There are other consequences of using mobile phones as well. A research published by London School of Economics argues that banning pupils from carrying mobile phones in schools showed a sustained improvement in exam results, with the biggest advances coming from struggling students.

In the days since the fire, Grenfell Tower has been held up as a tragic symbol of the social ills facing Britain: a detached political class; nearly seven years of a government-led austerity program that has sliced through the country’s welfare state; rising socioeconomic disparities; and a hastening decline in living standards. The U.K. has seen the biggest drop in average real wages in OECD countries except for Greece, according to an analysis by the London School of Economics’ Centre for Economic Performance.

Related publications

‘Real wages and living standards in the UK’. Rui Costa and Stephen Machin, CEP 2017 General Election Analyses Paper No. 036, May 2017

Theresa May and the Tories’ ‘wage pain’ is leaving millions of people struggling to make ends meet warned Britain’s largest union, Unite as official figures out today (Wednesday 14 June) showed a deepening wage squeeze. Official labour market figures out today showed that average earnings, excluding bonuses, fell in real terms by 0.6 per cent compared to a year earlier. The figures follow an analysis by the London School of Economics of OECD data showing the UK had suffered the biggest drop in average wages between 2007 and 2015 of any developed country except austerity-ravaged Greece.

Related publications

‘Real wages and living standards in the UK’. Rui Costa and Stephen Machin, CEP 2017 General Election Analyses Paper No. 036, May 2017

In total, the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) calculates, it would be best for the British economy to remain part of the EU’s common market.

Related publications

‘#GE2017Economists: The Research Evidence on Key Issues for Voters in the 2017 UK General Election’, Stephen Machin and Romesh Vaitilingam (Eds), CEP 2017 General Election Analyses Paper No. EA044, June 2017

A year ago, in June 2016, the British voted on their country's EU membership. Economists and financial markets were in bright turmoil and warned of the consequences of a Brexit. Today, twelve months later, the markets are no longer afraid of the Brexit. They fear for him. Only two years are left to the EU and the United Kingdom to agree on the conditions of the withdrawal. And with each passing day there is a growing likelihood that the horror scenario will occur: there is no agreement, no deal--"for the British economy, this would be the worst of all results," warns the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP).

Related publications

‘#GE2017Economists: The Research Evidence on Key Issues for Voters in the 2017 UK General Election’, Stephen Machin and Romesh Vaitilingam (Eds), CEP 2017 General Election Analyses Paper No. EA044, June 2017

erall, the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) calculates, it would be best for the British economy to remain in spite of Brexit part of the EU's common market. This, too, would incur costs, but in the case of a no-deal scenario, these costs would double. The British trade with the EU would break by 40 percent over the next ten years. The overall effect amounted to just under three percent of British per capita income. Every household on the island would cost about 1 900 pounds.

In total, the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) calculates, it would be best for the British economy to remain in spite of Brexit part of the EU's common market. This, too, would incur costs, but in the case of a no-deal scenario, these costs would double. The British trade with the EU would break by 40 percent over the next ten years. The overall effect amounted to just under three percent of British per capita income. Every household on the island would cost about 1900 pounds.

‘#GE2017Economists: The Research Evidence on Key Issues for Voters in the 2017 UK General Election’, Stephen Machin and Romesh Vaitilingam (Eds), CEP 2017 General Election Analyses Paper No. EA044, June 2017

The London School of Economics (LSE) has published a report assessing all of the party manifestos and how respective policies will affect key voter issues.

Intended to be "objective, brief and non-technical", the report by the LSE's Centre for Economic Performance looks at the evidence on the most-talked-about policies, including education, health, immigration, industrial strategy, living standards, regional policy and Brexit.

Related publications

‘#GE2017Economists: The Research Evidence on Key Issues for Voters in the 2017 UK General Election’, Stephen Machin and Romesh Vaitilingam (Eds), CEP 2017 General Election Analyses Paper No. EA044, June 2017

According to a London School of Economics (LSE) paper, Brits were the worst off when it came to their real wages, with pay falling by more than five percent between 2007 and 2015.

Researchers for the prestigious British university also found that all types of British earners, with the exception of pensioners and minimum wage workers, were no better off today than they were in 2008.

Following years of government budget cuts, parents are now turning to crowdfunding websites in order to provide basic school supplies. Appeals have been launched on websites including Justgiving.com for online donations towards items such as whiteboards and computers, as well as to pay for crossing attendents. … Prime Minister has echoed this claim several times, stating in an interview with Andrew Marr: “The level of funding going into schools is at record level.” However, Professor Sandra McNally from the School of Economics, University of Surrey, published an article​ fact-checking this “highest level on record” claim. She explains that only the “per pupil expenditure” (the amount spent on each pupil) is relevant, rather than the total amount of money available. According to Professor McNally, current spending per pupil was “largely frozen in real terms” between 2010 and 2016. And as onward spending is frozen in cash terms, this will likely lead to a “real terms reduction of around 6.5 per cent by 2019-2020”.

The UK has suffered the biggest drop in average real wages of any OECD country except depression-wracked Greece, according to a pre-general election analysis published by the London School of Economics.

The LSE's Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) uses OECD data to show that average wages for British workers, when adjusted for inflation, fell by more than 5 per cent between 2007 and 2015..

Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee claims that nominal wage growth will return close to 4% by 2019 are "rather implausible and over-optimistic", according to two respected academics at the Centre for Economic Performance. Interviewed for the latest MNI Reality Check, Professor Stephen Machin, Director of the CEP, along with Rui Costa, a fellow researcher at the body, said that existing pressures would not alleviate enough over the near-term horizon to justify the MPC's prediction laid out in the Bank's latest Inflation Report, published earlier this month.

According to Sandra McNally, professor of economics at Surrey University, the Conservatives’ figures are misleading. This is because the “per pupil figure” was frozen from 2010 to 2011 and again from 2015 to 2016.

She argues that an increase in the core funding for schools is not the same as an increase in the amount per pupil. A freeze in cash terms is likely to result in a reduction in real terms of 6.5 per cent between 2010 and 2020. This reduction has not happened yet and school funding has doubled in the last 20 years

Higher price inflation as a result of sterling’s depreciation following the vote to leave the EU, coupled with nominal wage growth stuck at a norm of 2% a year, means that once again the UK faces falling real wages, threatening family living standards. A new report from the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) – the first in a series of background briefings on key policy issues in the June 2017 UK general election – outlines what’s been happening to real wages and living standards, and considers relevant policies in the parties’ election manifestos.

In episode #002 Dr Sam Baars talks to George Duoblys. They ask do faith schools perpetuate social social segregation? Is focusing on white working class boys helpful? Do Ofsted’s gradings for nurseries really measure the right things? Centre for Economic Performance research by Jo Blanden, Kirstine Hansen and Sandra McNally mentioned in the video.

Related publications

‘Quality in Early Years Settings and Children’s School Achievement’, Jo Blanden, Kirstine Hansen and Sandra McNally, Centre for Economic Performance Discussion Paper No.1468, February 2017

It is well known and acknowledged in the government’s Industrial Strategy that Britain has a skills problem: ‘We have a shortage of technical-level skills and rank 16th out of 20 countries for the proportion of people with technical qualifications’. As the Green Paper also says, ‘a bewildering complex array of qualifications, some of which are poor quality, makes the system hard to use for students and employers’. This shortage of ‘technical level skills’ is important because it impacts on economic growth, inequality and social mobility. It also affects a lot of people. Well over half of young people do not do A-levels each year. Furthermore, only about 35-40% of a typical cohort finishing their GCSEs can expect to go to university. The shortage of ‘technical skills’ mainly needs to be supplied by those who choose non-academic pathways. This is a major educational issue and all parties should be addressing it in their manifestos.

David Blanchflower, a former Bank of England policymaker and a London School of Economics professor, is saying that wages are likely to remain low for several years. He’s particularly critical of how the Bank of England is handling the situation, as their forecasting for wage growth consistently expects it to revert to around 4% within 18 months which, at least for the last 10 forecasts, just hasn’t happened.

Attending a nursery with an outstanding Ofsted rating has ‘limited benefits’ for children’s education, says new research from the University of Surrey. The report, published last month, showed that a child’s educational achievement at the end of their reception year is only very slightly higher if they had been taught by a qualified teacher or attended an outstanding nursery. The study, conducted by researchers at the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP), looked at the information of 1.6 million children born between September 2003 and August 2006.

Research has shown that phonics can boost children’s reading age by an average of 28 months by the time they turn seven. Boys benefit the most from the back-to-basics system and actually overtake girls after just two years of school, according to a study by Dr Marlynne Grant, an educational psychologist, who analysed the performance of pupils taught to read using synthetic phonics from the reception year upwards. The school had high levels of special educational needs. However, a study by London School of Economics last year found that while phonics help children from disadvantaged backgrounds and those who do not have English as their first language, it has had "no measurable effect on pupils’ reading scores at age 11".

LSE has been particularly involved in the debate on Brexit through its submissions of written evidence in Parliament and academics appearing before select committees. LSE has responded to the Impact of Brexit on Higher Education and the Immigration inquiries.

The government is refusing to say whether more funding will be given to two “pioneering” FE research centres after their start-up grants end shortly.

Meanwhile, the Centre for Vocational Education Research is beginning to publish its own projects after being given a £3 million government grant in May 2015. Dr Sandra McNally leads the centre, and said that in the two years it has been running, her team has focused on “huge administrative data”, such as individual learner records, the national pupil database and longitudinal education outcomes data, in an attempt to process, code and apply it to their research.

A brake to the concentration. Still, according to a study of 2015 to the United Kingdom by the London School of Economics, the use of the current mobile phone impair concentration. The study, which looked at the school results of 130,000 students 91 institutions of the country, shows that students enrolled in schools that have banned mobile phone have better results than those enrolled in institutions where the smartphone is not banned. And the students the less comfortable at the school who in would suffer the most, explain the researchers.

According to a study published in the journal of the London School of Economics in may 2015, the ban on mobiles in schools would be beneficial for the academic performance of students. Researchers have shown that in schools that forbid it, results improved by 6.4 percent compared to other schools. In the United Kingdom, more and more schools ban their speakers mobile: they were 50% in 2012 and 98% in 2012 to prohibit them or collect them earlier today, according to the Guardian.

"What is their response to the conclusions of a recent report by LSE and Surrey University that graduate nursery teachers for three- to five-year-olds make a small impact on children's attainment compared to non=graduates; and whether they have any plans to review their policy regarding requirements for nursery staff to be graduates."

A majority six of ten Gulf News poll respondents think children should be banned from using social media sites altogether. Their opinion is in line with the findings of a study by the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, in the UK. Researchers found that banning mobile phones from school premises caused test scores of students to improve by 6.4 per cent — the equivalent of adding five days to the school year.

University of Surrey's economics senior lecturer, Dr Jo Blanden, said: "Successive governments have focused on improving staff qualifications, based on the belief these are important for children's learning. "Our research finding that having a graduate working in the nursery has only a tiny effect on children's outcomes surprised us. "It is possible it is driven by the types of qualifications held by those working in private nurseries, they are not generally equivalent to the qualifications of teachers in nursery classes in schools." The study was conducted by researchers at the Centre of Economic Performance (CEP) at the London School of Economics, University of Surrey and University College London.

…and there's a good piece on the BBC news website if you have a look at it so the couple of days so it is very current and it says gradual nursery staff have little effect on children OK having a graduate teacher industry only has a limited impact on children's attainment this is new research from the Centre of Economic Performance at the London school of economics.

Save the Children has disputed research which found nurseries with a qualified nursery teacher have only a “tiny effect” on children’s attainment.

Earlier this week, researchers from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, the University of Surrey and University College London, found that children who attended a nursery that employed a graduate had an Early Years Foundation Stage Profile (EYFSP) score that was only around a third of a point higher than those whose nurseries did not employ a graduate. The total number of points available is 117. Lead author Dr Jo Blanden, senior lecturer in Economics at Surrey University, said: “Our research finding that having a member of staff qualified to graduate level working in the nursery has only a tiny effect on children's outcomes surprised us, given existing research that finds well-qualified staff have higher quality interactions with children.” However, Save the Children has claimed that children without an early years teacher are almost 10 per cent less likely to meet the expected levels of development when they start school compared to children who do have a teacher. This comes from its ‘Untapped Potential’ report last November.

A university study says that inspectors are failing to spot the best and worst nursery schools by using 'traditional methods'

Parents have defended a pre-school rated ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted as a report shows the watchdog’s inspections don’t always reveal the best nurseries. The report published this week shows that sending children to an ‘outstanding’ nursery makes barely any difference to how well they develop in their early years. Researchers at the London School of Economics, University of Sussex and University College London, discovered that traditional measures used to evaluate nursery schools by inspectors failed to spot the best or worst schools.

The report titled 'Nursery Quality: New evidence of the impact on children’s outcomes', found that staff qualifications and Ofsted ratings cannot predict the quality of early years education, arguing that conventional methods of testing quality do not have a significant influence on educational outcomes. Co-author Dr Jo Blanden, senior lecturer in Economics at the University of Surrey, said: "Successive governments have focused on improving staff qualifications, based on the belief that these are important for children’s learning.

A report published today reveals that a child's educational achievement at the end of their reception year is only very slightly higher if he or she has been taught in nursery by a qualified teacher or early years professional. Attending a nursery rated as 'outstanding' by Ofsted, the regulator of educational quality in England, also has limited benefits. The study, conducted by researchers at the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) at the London School of Economics, the University of Surrey and University College London, matches data on children's outcomes at the end of reception with information on nurseries attended in the year before starting school for 1.6 million children born between September 2003 and August 2006.

Having a graduate teacher in a nursery has only a limited impact on children's attainment, new research suggests.

In England the government wants more graduate staff in nurseries in a bid to boost children's literacy and numeracy. But a study published by the London School of Economics (LSE) claims highly qualified staff had only a "tiny" effect on attainment. One early years group said the the report challenged "many of the assumptions" around current policy. The researchers, from the Centre for Economic Performance at LSE, Surrey University and University College London, looked at figures, drawn from the National Pupil Database, on about 1.8 million five-year-olds who started school in England between 2008 and 2011.

Sending children to a nursery school rated “outstanding” by Ofsted makes barely any difference to how well they develop, researchers at the London School of Economics, University of Surrey and University College London discovered.

Researchers from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, Surrey University and University College London, compared data on children's results with information on nurseries attended in the year before starting school for around 1.8 million youngsters born in England between September 2003 and August 2006. The findings showed that children who attended a nursery that employed a graduate have a teacher assessment score around a third of a point higher, where the total number of points available was 117.

New research finds that attending an outstanding nursery, or one with graduate staff, has a limited benefit to children's educational attainment.

The study of 1.8 million children born between September 2003 and August 2006, reveals that a child’s educational achievement at the end of their reception year is only ‘slightly’ higher if he or she has been taught in nursery by a qualified teacher or Early Years Professional (EYP).

It also found that attending a nursery rated outstanding by Ofsted had limited benefits.

Children with graduate nursery teachers achieve only slightly more by the end of Reception than children with unqualified teachers

Children who have access to a qualified teacher at nursery school do only slightly better at age 5 than those who do not, research suggests.

A new study concludes that a child’s educational achievement at the end of their Reception year is only very slightly higher if they have been taught in a nursery with a teacher trained to graduate level.

There was also little difference between those attending a nursery rated "outstanding" by Ofsted and others.

Researchers from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, the University of Surrey and University College London, compared data on children's results with information about the nurseries they attended in the year before starting school for around 1.8 million people born in England between September 2003 and August 2006.

Dr Hilary Steedman, senior research fellow at The London School of Economics, speaking on the BBC’s Today programme, said: “I think the IFS has really overstated their case here. We have a really serious skills problem in this country and we need to raise skills through apprenticeships in order to promote economic growth and improve our productivity levels, which are dire compared to Europe.”

A recent study found a ban on phones generally helps classroom performance research by the London school of economics found that after schools outlawed mobiles test scores of pupils aged 16 improved by 6.4 %.

Use of this website is subject to, and implies acceptance of, its Terms of use (including Copyright and intellectual property, Privacy and data protection, and Accessibility).
The London School of Economics and Political Science is a School of the University of London. It is a charity and is incorporated in England as a company limited by guarantee under the Companies Acts (Reg no. 70527).The registered office address of the School is: The London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK; Tel: +44 (0)20 7405 7686